We’re No. 1: In highest corporate taxes

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Come Sunday, America finally has something to crow about in its economic war with China and Japan: It will have the highest jobs-killing corporate tax rate in the industrialized world.

No, it’s not an April Fool’s joke. When Japan officially slashes its rate to 36.8 percent Sunday, America’s will be tops at 39.2 percent.

President Obama has proposed a rate of 28 percent, but Republicans charge that it comes with $350 billion in new, off-setting taxes. The GOP is pushing for a cut to 25 percent, but the election year is getting in the way of any deal.

The Business Roundtable has been pushing for a clean cut in corporate tax rates, claiming it would spur job growth and industrial reinvestment. They even cite a recent move by England to cut their tax rates from 28 percent to 22 percent, which officials called “an advertisement for investment and jobs in Britain.”

Tita Freeman of the Business Roundtable told Secrets, “Comprehensive tax reform is an imperative for the U.S. if we are going to remain a leader in the worldwide economy.”

Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, has also been pressing for action on the tax rate. “Even Russia, at 20 percent, and China, at 25 percent, have lower rates than America does. The difference in tax rates means American companies are trying to compete with one hand tied behind their backs,” he said.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/03/we%E2%80%99re-no-1-highest-corporate-taxes/424571

[Mike X Man 37]

You need to realize that that "39.2%" figure, in actuality is quite mythical. Almost NONE of US corporations pay that tax rate due to exemptions and loopholes in the IRS code. Many corporations pay much much less if they pay at all. Check this out for instance.

http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf

[luckytxn 2,264]

Come Sunday, America finally has something to crow about in its economic war with China and Japan: It will have the highest jobs-killing corporate tax rate in the industrialized world.

No, it's not an April Fool's joke. When Japan officially slashes its rate to 36.8 percent Sunday, America's will be tops at 39.2 percent.

President Obama has proposed a rate of 28 percent, but Republicans charge that it comes with $350 billion in new, off-setting taxes. The GOP is pushing for a cut to 25 percent, but the election year is getting in the way of any deal.

The Business Roundtable has been pushing for a clean cut in corporate tax rates, claiming it would spur job growth and industrial reinvestment. They even cite a recent move by England to cut their tax rates from 28 percent to 22 percent, which officials called "an advertisement for investment and jobs in Britain."

Tita Freeman of the Business Roundtable told Secrets, "Comprehensive tax reform is an imperative for the U.S. if we are going to remain a leader in the worldwide economy."

Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, has also been pressing for action on the tax rate. "Even Russia, at 20 percent, and China, at 25 percent, have lower rates than America does. The difference in tax rates means American companies are trying to compete with one hand tied behind their backs," he said.

http://washingtonexa...te-taxes/424571

Yeehaw. We're number one.

This should make the U.S. attractive to business.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Corporate earnings are rising and corporate income tax revenues are declining. Corporate profits were $1.7TN or so in 2010. Based on the tax rate, corporate income tax revenues should have been in the neighborhood of $600BN. Were they? Of course not. They were roughly a third of that - $200BN. That comes to an effective federal corporate income tax of 12%. I know, I know. I am not supposed to bring any factual arguments into the RWN federal government bash fest aka as VJ's P&R. But I just can't help it.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Corporate earnings are rising and corporate income tax revenues are declining. Corporate profits were $1.7TN or so in 2010. Based on the tax rate, corporate income tax revenues should have been in the neighborhood of $600BN. Were they? Of course not. They were roughly a third of that - $200BN. That comes to an effective federal corporate income tax of 12%. I know, I know. I am not supposed to bring any factual arguments into the RWN federal government bash fest aka as VJ's P&R. But I just can't help it.

And when you get actual facts bring them.Now in these other countries businesses are also allowed to take deductions for costs of doing business like we do in the U.S. further lowering their tax liabilities. The object is to make your country attractive to businesses.

[Pooky 3,807]

Corporate earnings are rising and corporate income tax revenues are declining. Corporate profits were $1.7TN or so in 2010. Based on the tax rate, corporate income tax revenues should have been in the neighborhood of $600BN. Were they? Of course not. They were roughly a third of that - $200BN. That comes to an effective federal corporate income tax of 12%. I know, I know. I am not supposed to bring any factual arguments into the RWN federal government bash fest aka as VJ's P&R. But I just can't help it.

Apparently, the President doesn't agree with your interpretation of international reality. Otherwise he wouldn't be looking to cut the US rate to a meager 28%

[ready4ONE 5,400]

And when you get actual facts bring them.Now in these other countries businesses are also allowed to take deductions for costs of doing business like we do in the U.S. further lowering their tax liabilities. The object is to make your country attractive to businesses.

How does your comment not void the silly OP?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Apparently, the President doesn't agree with your interpretation of international reality. Otherwise he wouldn't be looking to cut the US rate to a meager 28%

He's proposing a revenue neutral marginal rate reduction - i.e. lower the tax rate and close loopholes to offset the lost revenue. That's not actually lowering overall corporate taxes. It's leveling the playing field.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

How does your comment not void the silly OP?

[luckytxn 2,264]

He's proposing a revenue neutral marginal rate reduction - i.e. lower the tax rate and close loopholes to offset the lost revenue. That's not actually lowering overall corporate taxes. It's leveling the playing field.

You actually believe this ####### huh?

I am going to steal that pic and use it at a couple of other forums I frequent. Thanks.

I am going to steal that pic and use it at a couple of other forums I frequent. Thanks.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And when you get actual facts bring them.Now in these other countries businesses are also allowed to take deductions for costs of doing business like we do in the U.S. further lowering their tax liabilities. The object is to make your country attractive to businesses.

No, Sherlock. The actual objective is to level the playing field within the country. The US is and has been an attractive place to do business. Which is why we've had net foreign direct investment inflows for as long as you can look back.

You actually believe this ####### huh?

That's the administration's proposal on the table. Lower rate, fewer loopholes. No change in net revenue.

[luckytxn 2,264]

No, Sherlock. The actual objective is to level the playing field within the country. The US is and has been an attractive place to do business. Which is why we've had net foreign direct investment inflows for as long as you can look back.

That's the administration's proposal on the table. Lower rate, fewer loopholes. No change in net revenue.

OMG. I knew it.

[Pooky 3,807]

He's proposing a revenue neutral marginal rate reduction - i.e. lower the tax rate and close loopholes to offset the lost revenue. That's not actually lowering overall corporate taxes. It's leveling the playing field.

So, the rate is too high.

If it wasn't, companies like GE wouldn't need an army of tax attorneys to find every loophole possible to offset their actual tax liability. Got it.

Basically, the rate is too high.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So, the rate is too high.

If it wasn't, companies like GE wouldn't need an army of tax attorneys to find every loophole possible to offset their actual tax liability. Got it.

Basically, the rate is too high.

The rate is too high and the loopholes are too many. Rates have been stable for a long time. Loopholes are added frequently. Which explains why corporate income tax revenues decrease while corporate income multiplies. So yes, the rate is too high. Should be lowered. And loopholes should be closed. I can see tax credits or deductions for domestic job creation. That makes sense since the feds will then tax the incomes from those jobs. But tax cuts for overseas investments, for shipping jobs offshore. I don't think so. Corporations may negotiate their deals with the countries where the jobs are going. The US treasury should not be burdened for a corporation off-shoring jobs. And yet, they are.

[Neonred 3,575]

Corporate earnings are rising and corporate income tax revenues are declining. Corporate profits were $1.7TN or so in 2010. Based on the tax rate, corporate income tax revenues should have been in the neighborhood of $600BN. Were they? Of course not. They were roughly a third of that - $200BN. That comes to an effective federal corporate income tax of 12%. I know, I know. I am not supposed to bring any factual arguments into the RWN federal government bash fest aka as VJ's P&R. But I just can't help it.

So if the effective rate is 12% and we lower the actual rate to 28% and eliminate loopholes, how is that revenue neutral?

Should the same be done with personal taxes? Cut out the loopholes and deductions?